The simplest answer is: According to Quantum Physics from virtual particles.
I'm not very sure, whether quantum mechanics can deduce such interpretation from its postulates at all. In my opinion, "virtual particles" is just one of intuitively guessed interpretations of QM, which has no support in its formalism, though. The mainstream physics never thrown Aether model in its entirety - it's just trying to cover this fact by formal approach to physics.
If nothing else, such "trivial explanation" introduces a number of complex QM postulates into logical chain, so I personally consider any notion of "quantum physics" as an feasible explanation, the "most simple" explanation the less - until we cannot explain quantum mechanics itself.
Surprisingly, mainstream physics has quite serious problem to perceive reality by particle field from insintric perspective, i.e. it adheres to description of space-time as represented by water surface from perspective of much faster light waves, while introducing various abstract theories at the moment, when no faster waves are available, i.e. for description of light in vacuum by using of light.
While for me its quite logical and trivial, we can observe the situation at water surface from perspective of surface water waves, including the the situation of surface wave spreading itself. Every introduction of much faster waves into description introduces an assumption, whose validity cannot be guarantied in general case.
Why after five hundreds of years we have no formalism for description of water surface phenomena from perspective of its own waves? Such description could be developed by means of Victorian physics and it would seamlessly describe the situation in vacuum just by adding of another dimensions without need to introduce virtual particles, ad-hoced postulates, etc..
